The fact of the matter is that the appointment of a TYT is constitutionally provided albeit politically determined.
KOTA KINABALU : – Lawyer Bob Munang opined that the appointment of the Yang di-Pertua Negeri of Sabah (TYT) is not a matter of making a demand.
He said it’s a matter of upholding the political understanding reached by the early founding leaders.
He emphasised that this is in line with the spirit of the Malaysia Agreement.
Bob was responding to social media postings and public discussions on the appointment of Sabah TYT.
Bob explained that the position of the TYT is unlike the position of the Malay Rulers (Sultan, Raja, Yang Dipertuan Besar), where the former is a legacy of the British system, whereas the latter is a traditional/hereditary Malay system.
He argued that Sabah and Sarawak have always had a system of governorship based on the British system ever since both regions came under British rule.
The political understanding reached by the founding fathers of Sabah and Sarawak regarding the appointment of their respective Head of State and the Head of the State Executive ‘is a unique power-sharing system that all should be proud of and must uphold with great pride if Malaysia is to be a successful nation.’
Doing so, Bob believes, will make Malaysia more respected by other countries and a better place for all.
Bob further argued that the issue of a TYT appointment in Sabah is a matter that has been brought up before.
“But no State political leaders have been brave enough to even talk about it, he said.
Bob asked, “Why are we afraid to talk about something like this?”
Bob Munang, who is an Advocate and Solicitor in the High Court of Sabah and Sarawak, clarified that the appointment of a TYT as the Head of State is provided for under the State Constitution.
“There is nothing in the State or even in the Federal Constitution that expressly prohibits the appointment of any person as the TYT on the grounds of race or religion,” he pointed out.
“The fact of the matter is that the appointment of a TYT is constitutionally provided albeit politically determined, he added.
Bob admits that at the end of the day, it is what the government of the day want but hope that the State political leaders would give prominence to the spirit of the Malaysia Agreement 1963.
Bob points out that under Article 1 of the Sabah State Constitution, the person to be appointed by the Agong as the TYT is nominated by the Chief Minister.
However, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong can reject the nomination as it is a discretionary power provided by the State Constitution.
Further, he explained that under the Sabah State Constitution, a person to be appointed as TYT requires that the person nominated be a citizen.
Bob said one may argue that it has become a political convention for a person who profess the religion Islam to be appointed as the TYT.
“But this is not a valid and justifiable reason to deny a non-Muslim the position of TYT.”
“Political conventions are based on political decisions and circumstances, he said.
According to him, they are not law and hence, the State Government can depart from the previous political decisions.
Pursuant to Article 5B of the Sabah State Constitution, the head of the religion of Islam in Sabah is the Yang di-Pertuan Agong.
By legal implication, this validates the argument that the TYT need not be a person professing the religion of Islam.
Under Article 5B(2), the Legislative Assembly shall be responsible for making provisions for regulating Islamic religious affairs and for constituting a Council to advise the Yang di-Pertuan Agong in matters relating to the religion of Islam.
This constitutional provision further cements the valid argument that a person who is a non-Muslim can be appointed as the TYT.
The appointment of a TYT is also gender-neutral and open to any person as long as the person is a citizen of Malaysia, regardless of their marital status.
In other words, a person who is a citizen and single, divorced, separated, a widow, or a widower can also qualify and be appointed as the TYT as long as they are not disqualified and are nominated by the Chief Minister and consented to by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong.
“Many are not fully aware of Malaysia’s political history,” Bob said
When Malaya first gained independence in 1957, the founding fathers of Malaya also had an understanding of this matter and implemented a power-sharing arrangement whereby in the two non-Malay states, Penang and Malacca, when the Chief Minister is non-Malay, the TYT will be Malay and vice-versa.
So, in the post-Merdeka period, the first Chief Minister of Penang was Tan Sri Wong Pow Nee, a Chinese, and the first TYT was Tun Raja Uda Raja Muhammad, a Malay.
In Malacca, the first Chief Minister was Tan Sri Osman Talib, a Malay, and the first TYT was Tun Leong Yew Koh, a Chinese.
In the post-Malaysia period, the same political understanding was also implemented in Sabah, Sarawak, and Singapore.
In Singapore, the first TYT post-Malaysia was Tun Yusof Ishak, and Lee Kuan Yew was the Prime Minister. In Sabah, the first TYT was Tun Mustapha, and the first Chief Minister was Donald Stephens.
In Sarawak, the first TYT was Tun Abang Openg, and the first Chief Minister was Stephen Kalong Ningkan.
“The dreams of our founding fathers of Malaysia they envisioned based on partnership and respect will merely be dreams unfulfilled if the initial spirit of the Malaysia Agreement is not upheld,” Bob said.
So it is incumbent upon the new and incoming leaders to work towards the fulfilment of the spirit of Malaysia in its fullest sense.
